Tennis and snooker statistical rankings and ratings

[pinkisntwell]

I know there are plenty of people here that have undertaken research on statistical rating methods (Elo, Glicko, etc.) So have I, and I have made available some of my findings here: http://www.statsfair.com/ . There's tennis and snooker for now, and more will be added as suitable data is found. I would be interested in getting some feedback on the ratings and the website in general. Has anyone had luck following such systems? What were the problems you encountered during your research? The site is pretty bare-bones so far, so what would you like to see added?

[froment]

Re: Tennis and snooker statistical rankings and ratings Congratulations on idea and its implementation, Mr. Tzampanakis; looks nice and useful at the first sight! :clap I've moved your thread here, hope you don't mind - I'm sure you'll get much better response from guys who regularly follow tennis.

The site is pretty bare-bones so far' date=' so what would you like to see added?[/quote'] I'm not into tennis betting, but I had a look at your site, and I think there are several things to improve: 1) You need better explanation of content of your site - I have no clue how "Time navigation" works, why there is 260 weeks as default, what does mean "Race to" value (it might be race to number of sets, but why should you leave your visitor to guess it?) 2) You need to explain how odds chart works. By default, Nadal and Djokovic are selected, and chart tells me in 2010 odds for Nadal were 1.80, and Djokovic 1.75; in 2012, odds were 1.95 and 1.90, respectively, while back in 2006 odds were something like 1.67 and 1.47 respectively; that obviously makes no sense, but that's the way I read this chart… Odds section on FAQ page does not help - yes, average visitor will know what are European odds and probability, but will he know what the odds above represent? 3) The key to the series on the chart, these dots in the top left corner of the chart, are too small for comfortable reading - blue and green color are too similar to be distinguished easy; and why there are two small dots - make it one bigger dot or square. 4) Looks like you can choose only hard, clay and grass surface separately; but what if one wants to display ratings for all surfaces combined, or two of them combined? I don't know if it makes sense, but someone might want it, so you might want to make checkboxes for three surfaces, rather than plain links. 5) By default, 25 players are displayed per page, so one has to trawl through 6 pages; I'd rather have them all in the same screen, or even better, make drop-down menu and let visitor select number of entries per page, say, 25, 50, 100 or all. This way, if you want to compare two players, first is on the first page and second on the fifth page, you have to click four times back and forth to select and unselect them. 6) I accidentally moved my mouse over "Mean" and "Std" table captions, and noticed there was explanation of those columns when mouse-hovered. I spotted it by chance; otherwise I would not know it was there. Put small question mark in blue circle, or something similar there, so people know there is a hint and point their mouse there. 7) You might want to add country of the player; whenever I see ATP or WTA rank list, there is country, three letters in brackets, it's just nice to know where the player is from. Well, that's what I had to say about content; good luck with your project, keep it up! :ok BTW, site is not bare-bones, it offers what it's purpose is, and it does not need all the bells and whistles to work - I don't like sites that look like parrot, with dozens of banners around, so if I were you, I'd keep it as is, just polish the content. And I must say you got a great domain! I see you registered it a couple of weeks ago, but it had been registered earlier; out of curiousity, had you followed the domain untill it dropped, or just found it free?